Introduction: Convergence of Disciplines

AuthorRobert J. Currie
ProfessionSchulich School of Law, Dalhousie University
Pages1-47
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION:
CONVERGENCE
OF DISCIPLINES
A. INTRODUCTION
To the p erson who s ays he k nows noth ing about intern ational and tra ns-
national crime, the reply would have to be, “But of course you do; it is all
around us; it is constantly in the media.” Indeed, it is not hyperbole to
sta te tha t over t he las t deca de inte rnat ional a nd tra nsna tiona l cri me have
come to permeate a large part of the modern political, legal, and social
agendas of both states and the world at large. As a case in point, what is
arguably the most prominent and far-reaching socio-political event in
modern history — the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Penta-
gon on 11 September 2001 was a manifestation of international ter-
rorism, a phenomenon already well known to the world community. It
was “t ransnati onal” in the t ruest sen se of the word: it involved, as i s well
known, an attack in the US by a group of mostly Saudi nationals who
were members of a shadowy organization that was being at least loosely
run from Af ghani stan. The vict ims of the att acks we re nat ionals of sever-
al count ries. Pers ons allegedl y involved in pl anning the attac k have been
apprehended and subjected to trial in the US, the UK, and France. Others
have been transported to secret detention sites in still other states (some-
times without the knowledge of these states), interrogated, and subjected
to torture — which is itself an international crime.1
1 For example, Khalid Sheikh Moham med, believed to be one of the chief lieuten-
ants of Osama bin Laden and t he planner of the 9/11 attacks, was apprehended
INTERN ATIONAL AND TR ANSNATIONAL CRIM INAL LAW2
This horrendous cr ime was a forceful reminder that crime is not
now (if it ever was) a matter only of concern to domestic victim s, po-
lice, and prosecutors, and that crime suppression cannot stop at the
borders of any one state. The reactions to and effects of 9/11 have been
global in scope; they have included armed attacks on two sovereign
states, increased and sometimes dubious enforcement of “security”
goals by governments worldwide, the undermining of international hu-
man rights standards, and attempts to squelch legitimate public debate
about the eff‌icacy of these efforts.2 Other horrendous crimes have led
to signif‌icant inter national reaction. The international media has been
full of reports about the atrocities which occurred during and after
the breakup of the former Yugoslavia, the genocide that took place in
Rwanda in 1994, and more recently t he horrif‌ic carnage wrought by
government and militia forces in the Darfur region of Sudan.
And yet it is not just international and transnational crime, but
the bodies of law attaching to these phenomena, which are alive in the
media and in the public imagination. In particular, the enforcement of
what has traditionally been called “international criminal law” (ICL)
has been very visible. One need only consider the prosecutions under-
taken against former heads of state alone, which would have been un-
heard of twenty years ago: the arrest of former Chilean dictator Augusto
Pinochet in the UK on the basis that he was wanted for crimes by a
Spanish magistrate;3 the trial of Serbian strongman Slobodan Milosević
in Pakist an in March, 2003. He was tur ned over to US authorities, who tran s-
ported him to b e questioned at an “undisclos ed location,” and he was later
reported to have d ivulged information th at led to the capture of other high-
ranking A l-Qaeda f‌igures (see And rew Buncombe, “Attacks in Riyadh: Saud i
Bombs Expos e Myth of American Victor y in Terror War” The Ind ependent (14
May 2003) at 5). The US government recently dis closed that Mohammed had
been subject to the “ waterboarding” torture te chnique 183 times while in
custody: Scott Sh ane, “Waterboarding Used 266 Ti mes on 2 Suspects” The New
York Times (20 April 2009), online: www.msnbc.m sn.com/id/30302830/. At the
time of writ ing, Mohammed was on tri al at Guantanamo Bay.
2 “[T]he events of 11 Septemb er 2001 became a catalyst for the s ystematic
disregard of e stablished internat ional rules on human rig hts, the treatment of
combatant pri soners and the use of milit ary force around the world . . . . ” (Phil-
ippe Sands, Lawless World: Ma king and Breaking Global Rules, rev. ed. (London:
Penguin, 200 6) at 21). See also Internat ional Commission of Juri sts, Assessing
Damage, Urging Action: Re port of the Eminent Jurists Panel on Terrorism , Counter-
terrorism an d Human Rights (Geneva: Internationa l Commission of Jurists,
2009), online: www.icj.org/ IMG/EJP-report.pdf.
3 R. v. Bow Street Magistrate, ex par te Pinochet (No. 3), [2000] 1 A.C. 147 (H.L.).
See also Mich ael Byers, “The Law and Politics of the Pi nochet Case” (2000) 10
Duke J. Comp. & Int’l L. 415.
Introduction: Conver gence of Disciplines 3
before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
(ICTY), the f‌irst sitting head of government to be indicted and tried
by an international criminal tr ibunal;4 the trial, conviction, and execu-
tion of deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein before an Iraqi court for
international crimes committed while he was in off‌ice;5 the conviction
of for mer Rwan dan Pr ime Min ister Je an Kam banda b y the Int ernat ional
Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda;6 the trial of former Liberian President
Cha rles Taylor b efore the Sp ecial C ourt for Sie rra Leon e;7 the convi ction
of former Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori for torture, kidnappings,
and enforced disappearances;8 and the recent indictment of Sudanese
President Omar Al-Bashir by the International Criminal Court (ICC).9
Even the making of international law, not always a matter of signif‌i-
cant public interest, has had a high prof‌ile when international crime is
involved, as evidenced by the prominent coverage of the 1998 United
Nations conference in Rome that led to the conclusion of the Rome Stat-
ute of the International Criminal Court.10 The R ome Statute is, in many
senses, the pinnacle of the modern history of efforts to ensure account-
ability for international crime. That history, and the concurrent history
of inter-state cooperation in suppressing transnational crime, will be
brief‌ly surveyed below.
B. HISTORY
While ICL in its modern form truly emerged in the twentieth century,
some of the ideas and the mes which under pin it can be t raced back sev-
eral thousand years and brought forward through the ancient empires
4 Which was brought to a n untimely end by the defendant’s deat h due to illness
on 11 March 2006. See Mic hael Scharf & Willi am Schabas, Slobodan Milose vic
on Trial: A Companion (New York: Continuum, 2002).
5 Mariam K arouny, “Saddam Executed at Dawn” The Globe and Mail (30 Dece m-
ber 2006) A1. See Michae l Scharf, Saddam on Trial: Unde rstanding and Debating
the Iraqi High Tribunal (Durham, NC: Carol ina Academic Press, 20 06); Michael
Newton & Michael Sc harf, Enemy of the State: The Trial and Exe cution of Saddam
Hussein (New York: St. Mart in’s Press, 2008).
6 Kambanda (ICTR-97-23-A), Appeals C hamber Judgment, 19 October 2000.
7 Tayl or (SCSL-03- 01-T). Taylor’s tri al is currently under way be fore a special
panel of the Speci al Court for Sierra Leone, sitti ng in The Hague.
8 “Fujimori Gets Le ngthy Jail Term” BBC News (7 April 2009), online: http://
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi /americas/7986951.stm.
9 “Warrant Iss ued for Sudan’s Leader” BBC News (4 March 2009), online: http://
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi /africa/7923102.stm.
10 UN Doc. A /CONF.183/9; Can. T.S. 2002 No. 13 [Rome Statute].

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT